Richard Bolanos

City of Milpitas – Non-Safety Units

County of Sonoma – Safety and Non-Safety Units

Peralta CCD – Classified units

West Valley Mission CCD – Safety and Faculty Units

County of Mariposa – Safety and Non-Safety Units

City of San Luis Obispo – Safety and Non-Safety Units

City of Martinez – Safety and Non-Safety Units

County of Sonoma v. Public Employment Relations Board (Sonoma County Deputy Sheriff’s Association) (2022) – Successfully represented the County before the Court of Appeal, First District. The County sought to expand their Independent Office of Law Enforcement Review and Outreach (IOLERO)’s powers and duties to enhance law enforcement oversight and transparency.  Measure P was added to the ballot and passed by a majority of the vote.  Two labor associations representing County law enforcement and correctional officers, filed unfair practice charges against the County.  PERB reviewed the matter and determined that the County’s decision to place certain amendments to Measure P on the ballot was subject to bargaining and that other amendments were subject to “effects” bargaining.  The County appealed to the California Court of Appeal.

In a published decision, the Court vacated PERB’s decision that the County had had violated the MMBA by failing to bargain over its decision to expand law enforcement oversight. While the decision affirmed PERB’s findings on effects bargaining, it revised its tentative decision on PERB’s remedial authority following oral argument, finding that PERB exceeded its jurisdiction by invalidating Measure P amendments.  The Court of Appeal remanded the matter to PERB for further proceedings consistent with the Court’s decision.

Balestrieri et al v. Menlo Park Fire Protection District (2015) – Successfully defended the District against firefighters’ claims, alleging that the District was obligated to pay for time spent traveling between fire station to pick up or drop off “turnout gear,” before or after voluntary overtime shifts. The firefighters also claimed that the District should have included, in the regular rate calculation for overtime, the amount of money the District cashed out to employees for unused time in their “Annual Leave” bank. The firefighters claimed that the unused Annual Leave was akin to unused sick leave, which must be included in the regular rate. After the District successfully moved for summary judgment on both claims, the firefighters appealed. The Ninth Circuit affirmed the District Court’s decision and held that under the Fair Labor Standards Act, the travel time was not compensable. The Ninth Circuit also agreed that because the cashouts of annual leave were made in order to reduce the District’s liability for banked leave hours, the unused leave was not akin to sick leave and therefore did not have to be included in the regular rate used to calculate overtime.